History of the Central Synagogue, London

Talia Goldman

When the Central Synagogue was
established in 1855, the reasons were twofold, both religious and
socio-economic.The social shifts are
simpler to explain.Middle class and
wealthier Jews had been steadily moving out of the East End of London toward
the West End since the beginning of Queen Victoria’s reign, and the efforts of
attending synagogue daily on the other side of the city were becoming a
strain.The Great Synagogue, “the
longstanding centre of Synagogue life in London,”
(Shine) made a decision in 1848 that a traditional Orthodox synagogue must be
set up in west London
to deal with both of these issues.So the
Central was originally a daughter congregation of the Great Synagogue, “a
branch Synagogue more conveniently situated which would satisfy the religious
requirements of those who lived in the vicinity without modifying their
relationship to the original community” (Shine).As such, the Central “could not celebrate
marriages or appoint its own officers” (Lindsay 70).But the new synagogue became so successful in
the decade that followed that by 1870 it had been established as an independent
congregation.This synagogue continues
to play a vital role in the Jewish community of London, as it did from its first
moments.It is now helped by the efforts
of Rabbi Barry Marcus, who continues the work of the many charismatic rabbis
who devoted themselves to the Central.

To truly understand the importance
of the beginnings of the Central Synagogue on Great Portland Street, the religious
developments in the Jewish community during the nineteenth century must be
examined.The synagogue must be placed
in the larger context of the emancipation of the Jews of Europe, but more
particularly within the unique story of the Jews of England in the first half
of the nineteenth century.With the
Enlightenment and the emancipation of the Jews in France
and Germany,
the ghettos had for the most part been broken up.As citizens of their countries, reformers now
began to defy some of the elements of traditional Judaism, and the Reform
movement was born.English Jews,
however, were still in a different situation, although the Reform movement had
reached England
as well.Abraham Gilam, in The
Emancipation of the Jews in England,explains that “It is true that in
comparison with other European states, England was more tolerant and
humane.Although not benefiting from
full citizenship granted to French, Belgian, Dutch or Danish Jews, they could
circumvent many of the difficulties…But after the 1830’s, the Jews remained the
only unemancipated religious community in the country” (Gilam 15).Legally, if not in practice, medieval
dictates against the Jews were still in place, including restrictions against
owning land, and essentially leaving the Jews to the mercy of the crown.Although many of these laws were no longer
applied, Jews still could not serve in any national office because they would
not take the oath of abjuration that required the words “on the true faith of a
Christian” (Gilam 14).Gilam points out
that “In London, where the majority of Anglo-Jewry resided, Jews had to face
two other kinds of restrictions. First, there was the exclusion from the
freedom of the city and second was the selective admission to the Stock
Exchange” (Gilam 11).These, along with
limited access to the legal profession, severely handicapped the ability of
Jews in London
to participate in English society and economy.

It was these rights that were being
fought for in the early decades of the nineteenth century.In this fight for emancipation, the split
between the traditional, orthodox Jewish community and the Reform movement
became much more distinct.The Reform
leaders were not only pro-emancipation, they were pro-assimilation to a point
that traditional Judaism could not tolerate.“The majority of Anglo-Jewry followed a moderate leadership
which…affiliated with orthodox congregations…wished to retain its loyalties to
the Jewish heritage, but at the same time they wanted…civil rights” (Gilam 39).
The two groups differed greatly in
their expectations of emancipation, and in their efforts to achieve it.Gilam explains that “the best illustration of
this aspect can be seen in their dealings with Sir Robert Peel in 1845”.Fighting for “the removal of municipal
disabilities affecting Jewish subjects”, two different deputations were sent to
the Prime Minister claiming to represent the Jewish cause.Moses Montefiore led the deputation from the traditional
group, while Isaac Lyon Goldsmid led the Reform.Montefiore, as he and his supporters had done
through the entire process, wanted a gradual and reasonable emancipation
without compromising Jewish identity or ritual.The reformers advocated a swift and complete emancipation that essentially
amounted to complete assimilation into English culture (Gilam 42).By 1848, however, the struggle had escalated
beyond the scope of a few key individuals, and the Jewish community at large
was being encouraged to petition Parliament and become active in the fight for
emancipation (Gilam 99).The lines
dividing the Reform movement from the traditional became sharply defined, and
these were the conditions under which the Great Synagogue made its decision to
open an extremely necessary branch synagogue in West
London.

This was a response not only to the
fact that there was clearly a lot of contention between these two movements of
Judaism over the question of emancipation and politics, but that the liberal Reform
had to be confronted by the Orthodox on the field of religious establishments
as well.In 1840, a group of Jewish
reformers broke away from the main synagogues of London in order to form a separate
congregation.Paul Lindsay in The
Synagogues of London skims over the doctrinal disagreements between the
groups to focus on this simple ritualistic issue, saying merely “it soon became
a doctrinal issue”—the only reference he makes to the seriousness of this split
from the traditional community.The
initial point of contention, he says, was largely about the services, which
were still chanted in Hebrew, and the fact that many Jews were moving westward
and no longer wanted to attend services in the East End.This is not untrue; however, the differences
between the Reform movement and the main body of Judaism were much more complex
than that.Abraham Gilam explained it
concisely.He writes,

“The British reformers focused their
attack on traditional Judaism by rejecting the divinity of the oral law, which
for them, was a source of obstructionism and regression in Judaism…The point
must be clearly made…that the differences between the English Reform and
orthodox creeds concerned profound theological matters; they were not limited
to ritual alone” (Gilam 42).

By denying the authority of the Talmud, the ancient oral law
which forms a crucial part of the religion, the reformers were not changing
elements on the surface, but at the core of Judaism.When the Reform congregation settled into first
a small building on Bruton Street
and then a larger venue in Cavendish
Square because of the influx of new members, the
leaders of the traditional Jewish community realized that starting their own
synagogue in that area was necessary.If
there was no orthodox synagogue there, it was distinctly possible that all the
Jews who had moved westward would begin to attend the Reform Synagogue.The new Chief Rabbi, Nathan Marcus Adler, who
took over the post in 1844, was more aware of this potential problem than his
predecessor, Solomon Hirschell, has been, and he urged the Great Synagogue into
action (Lindsay 84).The decision of
1848 to create the Central was not brought to fruition until 1855 due to delays
in building, but finally the new synagogue was consecrated on March 29 by Chief
Rabbi Adler, Reverend Simon Ascher, Chazan (reader) of the Great
Synagogue, and Reverend A.L. Green, who was chosen to be the Chazan of
the new branch (Shine).

The first
building to house the new Central Synagogue was a converted warehouse at 120 Great Portland Street,
and the building seated 212 downstairs and 144 in the women’s gallery
(Shine).For its first years the Central
acted only as a daughter Synagogue to the larger institution of the Great
Synagogue, but “in view of the increasing Jewish population” (Shine) in the
area, its membership grew.Despite the
fact that in 1863 a new Orthodox Synagogue was built in Bayswater, which drew
many members from the Central, “the vacant seats were filled rapidly” (Renton 73) and the need
for a permanent new building for the Central became apparent.In 1866, a committee met and decided “in
favour of a block of leasehold houses being taken in Great Portland Street (the
site of the present building) for a period of eighty years” (Shine).Sir Anthony de Rothschild led a meeting two
years later to approve the project and form a building committee.N.S. Joseph was appointed architect, and “the
style of the building agreed upon was Moresque” (Shine).The foundation stone was laid by Baron Lionel
de Rothschild on March 18, 1869, and the building at Nos. 133-141 Great Portland Street was
completed in 1870.At the consecration
of this new building on April 7, the Ark was opened by an eighty-five year old
Sir Moses Montefiore, and the ceremony led by Chief Rabbi Adler.

By this time, the Central had grown
so much that when the United Synagogue formed later in 1870, the Central
“became the fifth of its constituents” (Shine) as an independent congregation.“On the 14th July 1870, an Act bringing into
existence that United Synagogue received the Royal Assent,” wrote Rabbi Cyril
Shine in his “History of the Central Synagogue”.This union of the five main London
synagogues was meant to bring the orthodox Jewish population of London together, and had
been urged into creation by Chief Rabbi Adler, who once again saw the potential
devastating division of the community and acted to stop it.The United Synagogue became and still is “the
religious parent organization for the largest section of Anglo-Jewry with a
dominant role in its national institutions” (Linday 31).From 1870 onwards, the Central held a
prominent place in the spectrum of London
synagogues.

Many of the most prominent Jewish
families in London
were involved in the synagogue, particularly the Rothschilds.Both Baron F. de Rothschild and Sir Anthony
de Rothschild were wardens and board members.That the Central’s prominence extended beyond the Jewish community of London can be shown by
the visit of the Emperor of Brazil in July of 1871.He attended Sabbath services, both Friday
night and the following morning.Rabbi
Shine writes:

The ‘Times’, which reported the event in great
detail on its opening page, added, “we understand that the visit of the Emperor
to the Central Synagogue is the first that has been paid in this country by a
reigning Sovereign to a Synagogue during Divine Service.We may add that his Majesty is versed in the
Hebrew language, and was consequently able to read and understand the service.”
(Shine)

This was clearly a great honor and an important moment in
the history of the synagogue, particularly when it had just been established as
an independent congregation.In the
years that followed, other royal visitors paid attention to the Central,
including H.R.H. the Prince of Wales in 1881 and again in 1898.Other important services were held that were
perhaps only important to the Jewish community of West London: in 1905, the
Golden Jubilee service of the establishment of the Central, and in 1920, a
service for the Golden Jubilee of the new building and the Central’s birth as
an independent congregation.

The
Central, as it developed, became much more than just a place for services.In 1880, Religious Classes for children were
instituted, beginning a long standing tradition of emphasizing the importance
of education.Military services began
during the festival of Chanukah in 1892, and continued to be held until the
outbreak of World War I.During the
Great War, the Central played its part—first with the Reverend Adler, the
Chazan, taking leave in order to go to the Front as a chaplain in 1914.In 1917, the Synagogue basement was turned
into an air-raid shelter, and the Jubilee service in 1920 included a memorial
ceremony for the soldiers who had fallen during the War.A memorial candelabrum was donated, and its
eighteen candles were lit during the ceremony (Shine).The significance of this candelabrum is
immense; today it is the only surviving artifact from before the second World
War.It was found broken by Rabbi Marcus
and Mr. Leonard Fertleman and was completely restored in 2004, and “now has a
permanent place in the Synagogue.The
nineteen memorial candles are lit every year at the commencement of Yom Kippur
and remind of the congregation of sacrifice, survival and continuity” (anniversary
7).

This one
item holds so much value for the community at the Central because the Synagogue
was bombed and destroyed by the Germans in 1941.Even with their building destroyed, the
community was not; services continued at Adolph Tuck Hall, Woburn House.Beginning in 1948 the congregation was using
a temporary synagogue in the basement of the Great Portland Street site, as building
licenses were difficult to obtain in the aftermath of the War.Rabbi Shine explains that

“during the two years that elapsed
before the completion of the new Synagogue, the Sabbath and Festival services
were once again held at the Adolph Tuck Hall, Woburn House.The High Festival services were held at the
Dukes Hall, of the Royal College of Music.Daily services were maintained at Hallam Street in the remaining part of
the old building, as was the office administration and the Hebrew Classes”
(Shine).

When the Central’s permanent building was finally completed
and consecrated in March of 1958, having been licensed in 1955, there was to be
a school included as part of the building; this continued in the tradition of
education as an element of the Synagogue.The new building kept the same basic style as the original, with a
women’s gallery, and beautiful stained glass windows created by David Hillman were
installed in 1962.

Despite the consequences of two
World Wars, the Central continued in all of its work, and developed even more
after its reconstruction.Youth groups
were organized, Adult Education Classes were instituted, and many new members
joined.For the first time in its
history, in 1963 the Central held a midnight Selichot service (a special
service in the days before the High Festivals) which became a regular
practice.The Synagogue celebrated its
centenary in 1970.Significant as well
is that suddenly the Central, as it had been after its consecration in 1870,
after its consecration became a focus of non-Jewish attention in addition to
Jewish.“A feature of the new Synagogue
was the attendance of large groups of non-Jews, from 20 to 200 in number who
came to the services or visited the Synagogue,” writes Rabbi Shine.The connection to the secular world continued
into the decades that followed.In 1960,
when Sir Bernard Waley-Cohen, a member of a family that had been involved with
the Central for three generations, was elected Lord Mayor of London, Reverend
Cyril Shine was appointed his Domestic Chaplain—Rabbi Shine added, in his
“History”, that “This was the first occasion that a Jewish Chaplain had been
appointed to the Lord Mayor of London since the inception of the Lord Mayoralty
nearly 800 years ago.”One of the
Wardens, Mr. Isaac Wolfson, was honoured with a Baronetcy in 1962; his family
was another that had been active for generations and continued to be
afterwards.After World War II, there
was another development that affected the Central and the Jewish community
worldwide—the formation of the State of Israel.During both the Six Day War in 1967 and the Yom Kippur War in 1973, all
the members of the Central showed their solidarity and support for Israel with
days of prayer.

Since his appointment in 1995,
Rabbi Barry Marcus has continued to keep the Central active in both the Jewish
community and the rest of the world.He
“pioneered the concept of a one day educational visit to Auschwitz-Birkenau” in
1998; these visits “have educated a wide range of people from all denominations
in Great Britain”
(anniversary 6).In 2005, the German
Ambassador visited the Central for a Sabbath service at the invitation of Rabbi
Marcus.The Ambassador “addressed the
community…and spoke of the dignity of the Synagogue service and his commitment
to better understanding” (anniversary 7).Developing the international role of the Central, Rabbi Marcus spoke at
the Anniversary of the Rwandan Genocide at City Hall and was “thereafter
invited by the Survivors Organization to visit Rwanda in October 2007 to offer
support and guidance” (anniversary 7).

In 2008, the Golden Jubilee of the consecration
of the post World War II building, I had the honor and pleasure of becoming a
part of this historical and still thriving community during my studies in London.Rabbi Marcus told me that although “one of
the downsides to an inner city synagogue is that access to families is limited
by virtue of property prices and location, there is an annual regeneration of
students”, like myself, because of all the universities in the area.There is another, “sadder source of people,”
Rabbi Marcus said, “that the Synagogue is surrounded by hospitals.Almost every week,” there are people who come
to services at the Central because a family member is in the hospital.But the Central’s location in town also means
that visitors to London
turn up there, looking for a synagogue, and often this creates a very
international environment and, as Rabbi Marcus says, provides “a taste of
what’s going on in the Jewish world”.And the Londoners whose families have been involved for generations are
still immensely proud of the Central—“people are quite passionate about
maintaining a tangible connection” even though they no longer live in the
center of the city.Rabbi Marcus stated
firmly that the international and social elements of his work at the Central
are important, but that he believed it was incredibly crucial to “keep an
ongoing and continuous Orthodox presence in the center of the city”.This has been the role of the Central
Synagogue since its beginnings, and still is today.